You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Faster rendering please

Posted: Mon, 20th Jul 2009, 2:24am

Post 1 of 5

Sagerman

Force: 1000 | Joined: 4th Dec 2007 | Posts: 27

VisionLab User

Gold Member

I'd like to see VisionLab able to render videos faster. i bought VL a year ago but didn't put it to serious use because I didn't have time to learn its fine points of applications and features. So I used Ultra 2 for chroma keying, and sometimes Ulead Studio or even Vegas 6, version 9 now have version 9). But lately, I have finally sort of self-educated myself to some of the features I actually bought VL for. Now that I understand the rudiments, I now know why I knew I'd like this software when I bought it. I will be using it seriously for sure now. BUT I'm spoiled. Ulead, Vegas (especially) and Ultra 2 render so much faster than VL. It's wasteful to wait for it to finish even when I can be doing other things with the computer while it renders. So more rendering speed will be very welcome, PLEASE.
Posted: Mon, 27th Jul 2009, 8:34am

Post 2 of 5

fraud

Force: 2000 | Joined: 18th Aug 2008 | Posts: 9

VisionLab User VideoWrap User

Gold Member

you could also try getting some graphics cards for your computer designed for video rendering.
Posted: Sat, 1st Aug 2009, 8:42pm

Post 3 of 5

Sagerman

Force: 1000 | Joined: 4th Dec 2007 | Posts: 27

VisionLab User

Gold Member

fraud wrote:

you could also try getting some graphics cards for your computer designed for video rendering.
Thanks. I could but at some point a budget restrictive existence has a draw a line. My notebook has a 512MB card (nVidia)8300. I don't know if it for specifically for rendering or just game playing. I know that Ultra 2, Ulead Studio 11, and even the slow poke Camtasia Studio 6 renders faster than Vision Studio Lab. Ulead (Corel bought them) and Ultra 2 are especially fast.

My notebook has 4GB, a Core 2 Duo processor (Intel) 2.66 speed, and three 500GB internal HDs. In essence it is a desktop (or tower case) packed into a 17" notebook and four fans and copper heat sinks and pipes to dump excessive heat while mounted on an Xpad to maximize air flow beneath the machine. For good measure, I have a very powerful hand vacuum for clearing the vents of dust (no much accumulates since moving form Nevada to Kentucky). So I'm making sure it is at optimum performance but rendering with VSL is S L O W. I still love the software and after learning more about using it, it is becoming my major software to the point I will likely remove Ulead Studio and regulate Ultra 2 to infrequent use.
Posted: Mon, 5th Oct 2009, 4:13pm

Post 4 of 5

pscamm

Force: 2225 | Joined: 5th Nov 2006 | Posts: 300

VisionLab User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Not sure about this but i have 4 cores and if you watch visionlab on the timeline and during render time, theoreticaly, winxp's task managers performance tab should show more or less 90-100% on CPU usage.

On the timeline, with a straight clip at 1440 x 1080 (deinterlaced) with only a ambient light filter applied to it, hitting the 'preview render timeline selection' button only see's my CPU usage at no more than 30% - Rendering this same clip only shows the CPU usage 45-55%

Now correct me if im wrong but at 55%, 2 of my cores are more or less asleep, and, on the timeline at 30% almost 3 are asleep.

Visionlab could do with some lovely optomizations in the multi-threading department across the board me thinks

smile

That would really get things moving faster
Posted: Sat, 17th Oct 2009, 12:29pm

Post 5 of 5

Sagerman

Force: 1000 | Joined: 4th Dec 2007 | Posts: 27

VisionLab User

Gold Member

I must agree that VSL isn't using the CPU at optimum efficiency and this is a drawback. I intend to use it seriously for creating videos relevant to American Sign Language (ASL) instruction videos. Rendering will be an issue when I begin focus on ASL classifier representations in storytelling.